Why is Linux distro's market share below Mac OS?

[infestor]

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8

is it because people fall in love with their mac/macbook (slick design and powerful hardware) and the appearance of mac os x?

[Tibuda]

Adobe suite and other commercial apps are available for Mac.

[infestor]

Adobe suite and other commercial apps are available for Mac.

sure that is a valid designer reason

also in gaming macs are able to run more games natively, i guess. like blizzard games.

[Xbehave]

Apple spend a lot on marketing
Apple has always had a significant market share (e.g before desktop linux was workable for non-geeks)
Apple hardware is integrated with the software and works OOB every time

[t0p]

Adobe suite and other commercial apps are available for Mac.

That's definitely one reason.

There's also the fact that when you buy an Apple computer, you know that the harware and OS will have no compatible issues. This is not always the case with Linux. Linux hardware compatible is actually pretty good nowadays; but this was not always so, and memories of "the bad old days" still linger.

But the major reason for MacOS's greater success is marketing. Apple are very very good at marketing. Whereas the disparate nature of Linux makes its marketing less effective than one might wish. Some distros do next to no marketing. We could definitely learn a thing or two about marketing from Apple.

[chucky chuckaluck]

marketing and lots of people love their macs (as if they were teen idols, almost).

[Zzl1xndd]

I would not put a lot of Stock in Net Applications numbers. The Linux market share has been estimated anywhere between 1-10% depending on who is asked. Unless Google starts publishing its trafic numbers im gonna assume its around 5.

[samjh]

According to w3schools.com, the Linux market share is around 4.2%:
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

Considering that the site is likely to attract enthusiasts who are more likely to be using Linux than the average computer user, I think that figure is pretty optimistic. Even so, it's still lower than the percentage of Macs (6.8%).

Apple markets its products better, MacOS is better supported by commercial software developers (MS Office, Adobe products, games, and so on), and thanks to Apple's excellent tie-in between MacOS and its own hardware, it "just works" better than Linux.

[Teber]

mac used to have a very strong position in the fields of dtp webdesign and drawing in general. possibly still has. professionals use macs and just love them

[infestor]

Is it such a bad business idea to manufacture hardware exclusive to linux?

[corsakh]

But the major reason for MacOS's greater success is marketing. Apple are very very good at marketing. Whereas the disparate nature of Linux makes its marketing less effective than one might wish. Some distros do next to no marketing. We could definitely learn a thing or two about marketing from Apple.
The whole world could learn a thing or two about marketing from Apple. No one does marketing like Apple. They know how to make stuff that people need and how to convince everyone else they need it too. I mean seriously, since when were computer peripherals cool? Apple knows how to make even a mouse cool.

[Zoot7]

According to Microsoft, Linux has a bigger market share than Apple:
http://www.osnews.com/story/21035/Ballmer_Linux_Bigger_Competitor_than_Apple

I'd say they're not too far away from one another, of course it's a very hard number quantify.

[Macintosh Sauce]

As a long-time Mac user I can answer this. I have been using Macs since Commodore killed the AMIGA. My first Mac, Power Macintosh 5400/180, had System 7.5.5. I gravitated towards the Mac from the AMIGA because of the GUI. Note that I do use Windows for some gaming but otherwise I cannot stand Microsoft's pathetic imitation of the Mac OS.

I have stuck with Apple through the bad times and also the good times. Macs just work as they were designed to. Ever since the first iMac was released Apple has been a different company than they were in the past. They are much smarter in what they do now.

After getting the original Bondi Blue iMac, my (now) wife switched to the Mac to buy a Grape iMac. She had been using a really pathetic Windows machine until that point. A while after that I got my first pro Mac - Power Mac G4 (MDD). Since Macs hold their value pretty good I was able to sell it for $1000 and put that money towards a new Mac Pro when Apple went over to Intel processors (the best move they ever made). That Mac Pro is still running perfectly after three years. I just put in two 2 TB WD HDs and an ATI Radeon HD 4870 video card. Now it has a whole new lease on life. The ATI Radeon X1900 XT video card I had was starting to cause me a lot of graphics-related problems so I found out that I could replace it with the newest card available from Apple and ATI. The new card is quieter and is working perfectly with the MacPro1,1.

I am running Mac OS X 10.6.1 Snow Leopard on my Mac Pro and this new version of the Mac OS is bloody fast. My Mac Pro boots up in less than 20 seconds with Snow Leopard. Call me impressed...

Another reason to love the Mac - works perfectly with the iPhone 3GS. Seamless is more like it...

I use my Mac for graphics, music, programming, etc. Everything just works so nicely together - like it was meant to be. I can't say that about Windows or even Linux. I experiment with Ubuntu in VMware Fusion just to see what's new in the Linux world. Still not up to the Mac OS X standard...

[TheLastDodo]

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8

is it because people fall in love with their mac/macbook (slick design and powerful hardware) and the appearance of mac os x?

The hardware design is part of it, but all in all, I'd say it's because of OS X. Not just the look, mind you, but the general ease of use, which I put down to things like interface design and automation. It's hardly perfect, but given what the competition's put out there, I'd say it's the best desktop UI currently on the market. It's very easy to tweak to your own needs, and stuff like Automator really helps with simplifying one's workflow. All in all, it's a nice combination of polish and functionality.

Linux and its various UIs have been too fractured thus far to achieve that level of usability, but that might change sometime next year when Google's desktop OS is due to hit (assuming it's what you'd still call Linux); I guess we'll see soon enough.

[Simian Man]

Because to use Mac all you have to do is got to the store and buy a Mac.

To use Linux you have to figure out where to download it, download an iso, burn it to a disc, boot from it, and complete an installation. This is second-nature to most of us, but most people are lost on this.

Seems pretty obvious to me.

[maflynn]

One large reason is people who buy macs, do so not just for the hardware but the OS and software. Why spend more money on hardware (apple premium) only to run a free OS.

An operating system's job is run applications, the Apps available on the Mac (and windows) platforms are generally not available on Linux. For instance, I use Adobe Lightroom, that's not available in Linux.

[forrestcupp]

1. Have you ever seen a Mac vs. PC commercial?
2. Have you ever seen a Linux commercial?

3. How many Mac owners do you hear complaining that they can't get MacOS X working on their computers?
4. How many Ubuntu users do you hear complaining that they can't get Ubuntu working on their computers?

[Swarms]

3. How many Mac owners do you hear complaining that they can't get MacOS X working on their computers?
4. How many Ubuntu users do you hear complaining that they can't get Ubuntu working on their computers?

This a pretty good reason. Mac OS is much easier to use because it has the luxury of being very tightly integrated with the hardware it is sold with.

A place where Ubuntu has to be very innovative to be able to compare.

[Nick Rhodes]

IMHO lack of advertising and marketing (no brand awareness to the general public (not to other geeks) like with Apple and Microsoft) and Distro-confusion (people complain about having half a dozen versions of Window to choose from, alone dozens of distros).

Cheers, Nick

[NoaHall]

Marketing. And people are scared of installing themselves.

I find my Ubuntu to be much more stable than my Mac. And it's much quicker too. And it isn't disgusting with hardware like the Mac.

[realzippy]

" 2. Have you ever seen a Linux commercial? " :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDgEdcFTquM

[Groucho Marxist]

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8

is it because people fall in love with their mac/macbook (slick design and powerful hardware) and the appearance of mac os x?

I feel it is because of marketing muscle; Apple has the considerable resources to mount major media campaigns across multiple formats. What Linux needs is a marketing team to match the power of the open-source OS. Right now in college, I'm working on refining my own repertoire of promotions and sales skills in order to create an effective and memorable Linux/ Ubuntu Linux ad campaign in the not too distant future. :)

[Zzl1xndd]

Marketing. And people are scared of installing themselves.

I find my Ubuntu to be much more stable than my Mac. And it's much quicker too. And it isn't disgusting with hardware like the Mac.

My Other half is an Apple person and I would say that our experence with our respective OS's are mostly on Par. However the integration between here Mac mini, Mac Book, iPod, and Apple TV is really nice.

[betrunkenaffe]

I wouldn't bother with that website, the numbers are extremely inconsistent. In one month, apple's share halved and Linux drop by 1/3.

[benj1]

don't forget these results will be very US/Euro centric.

i think the figures could be right for the US, i would be surprised if they were correct for europe, and i would say theyre just wrong for the rest of the world.


at the very least, take them with a very large pinch of salt.

[ratcheer]

I bought my son a 17" Macbook Pro to take to university. He loves it. I am jealous.

He upgraded it to Snow Leopard. He loves it even more. I am even more jealous.

While I sit messing around with upgrades, video drivers, and Pulse Audio, he has about a thousand apps that all work. The upside is that he can do just about anything he can imagine with his computer. The downside is that he doesn't get to learn how to fix and configure everything, every day. Which is better? To be honest, if I had enough money, I would get a Macbook Pro, too.

Tim

[Jr.Muffin]

In a regular users perspective, they don't really care that much about the software when their watching a commercial. For example, one of friends wants one, but he's not a geek like me. He wants one because it looks cool, it has no viruses, and he loves the Apple brand.

Software is important, don't get me wrong, but when a user who doesn't know much about operating systems looks at a Mac commercial he doesn't think "I Hope they have all the programs I need", they just think "Wow that looks soo cool. I want one."

[hellmet]

Is it such a bad business idea to manufacture hardware exclusive to linux?
Absolutely not. But it'd be great if someone came up with a nice looking PC/laptop and used a ultra-polished version of Linux (just for that hardware). Bundle software that work. Rewrite ugly applications for usability. I'm sure it would work wonders for Linux. I would love to join such a (commercial) project.

And you know what? Let it be expensive. And let it look expensive. People like drooling over expensive stuff. They collect expensive items. Fulfill their need of a big-ticket item. :D

[aysiu]

Suppose you are a Windows user who is thinking about (but who has never tried) an alternative to Windows before.

If you decide "I'm going to get a Mac," all you do is go to your local Apple store or go to the online Apple store or go to a retailer like Best Buy, select which Mac you want, and then turn it on. The Apple store will actually try to get you to buy a Mac and explain all the advantages to you. Likewise, Best Buy salespeople may do the same.

If you decide "I'll get a Linux," you can either try to figure out which Linux to get and download an .iso file and figure out how to burn it, figure out how to boot from CD, wonder about partitioning, and then cross your fingers regarding hardware compatibility; or you can search for Linux preinstalled and end up A) finding a Linux-dedicated vendor you've never heard of or that doesn't ship to your country, or B) finding a mainstream vendor that wards you off Linux and "recommends" Windows or also possibly doesn't ship to your country.

It should be quite obvious why Linux distros' marketshare is below Mac OS X.

If Linux wants to succeed, it needs a company like Apple (but less restrictive, obviously) that is willing to dedicate itself to a few preinstalled hardware configurations that work out-of-the-box and that are marketed correctly (and positively). No preinstalled option should be "marketed" as "The most important thing to know is you will not be getting Windows" and "This isn't compatible with popular applications like iTunes and email."

The distro that's tied to these preinstalled select models should never have regressions that affect those models.

For more details, read Ubuntu: The Open Source Apple Challenger? (http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/ubuntu-the-open-source-apple-challenger/)

[Xbehave]

If Linux wants to succeed, it needs a company like Apple (but less restrictive, obviously) that is willing to dedicate itself to a few preinstalled hardware configurations that work out-of-the-box and that are marketed correctly (and positively).
The problem is apple mark up their hardware on the strength of their software. With linux this isn't really an option as you can just buy a cheaper machine and install Linux on it.

[aysiu]

The problem is apple mark up their hardware on the strength of their software. With linux this isn't really an option as you can just buy a cheaper machine and install Linux on it.
If you're a geek, of course.

But most computer users do not have the right attitude / knowledgebase to install, configure, and troubleshoot an operating system themselves.

[The Funkbomb]

Mac fanboys are the worst thing Apple ever created.

[hoppipolla]

Ubuntu or any of it's variants probably still isn't QUITE as friendly as Windows/OSX, and it also doesn't have the same amount of specialist software. Additionally, while it actually supports far MORE hardware than OSX, people interpret that as "it should run on absolutely everything", and then get surprised when their piece of hardware isn't supported due to Linux drivers not being as plentiful as Windows ones yet.

I also think KDE 4.x reaching maturity will have a significant impact.

I say give it time, Ubuntu will continue to improve, and we will probably get there and beyond within... 2 or 3 years?

[handy]

To answer the thread title question:

Because the vast majority of computer users do not want to install or mess with operating systems.

Believe it or not, some people actually go & buy a new computer when windows gets too badly corrupted.

The smart ones go & buy a Mac. :)